Category Archives: Chapel Hill 2020

Posted onJanuary 24, 2017|Comments Off on Elkin Hills Conservation District Approved by Council

Monday night, Jan 23rd, was an exciting night for the Elkin Hills neighborhood. After 6 years of hard work the Town Council voted to create a Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) in Elkin Hills, one of Chapel Hill’s oldest neighborhoods.

Elkin Hills is one of the last relatively affordable neighborhoods near UNC. It consists almost entirely of small, single-family houses, built in the late 1940s and early 1950s, when a typical American house was less than 1,000 square feet. Many houses in Elkin Hills are even smaller, at 800 square feet, but most include modest front yards and backyards that give residents a feeling of spaciousness. Elkin Hills is a modest, pleasant, leafy place to live. The NCD will allow the neighborhood to retain its current character as a quiet, safe and walkable area with plentiful vegetation and birds.

Part of the neighborhood’s appeal, in addition to its location within walking and biking distance of downtown Chapel Hill, is that the mix of small to mid-size houses attracts a diverse population of owners and renters that include families with children, senior citizens, students, UNC faculty, single people and couples of all ages.

Several years ago the neighbors began meeting to discuss their concern that future development of Carolina North, along with the rapid pace of town-wide development, would destroy the peaceful character and affordability of Elkin Hills. The Council vote represents the culmination of countless meetings and discussions with Elkin Hills residents and town staff. The town manager is recommending that the council create the NCD, but the council needs to hear from all citizens that they wish to protect what makes Chapel Hill special.

Chapel Hill is under tremendous pressure to urbanize. Some people believe that replacing single-family houses with duplexes and multi-family units will result in more affordable housing for everyone. But does this argument make sense? Development and redevelopment inevitably come with higher per-unit costs, as builders seek to maximize their return on investment.

The NCD is a tool for preserving moderate-priced housing. Preserving existing moderate-priced housing is always cheaper than trying to build new affordable housing. It’s impressive that neighbors have worked together 6 years and come up with a result that has required substantial compromises.

It’s important for Council members to respect the long process and the result of their work. Adding duplexes would not make this neighborhood more affordable as new construction is more expensive. But it also would undercut their work.

Finally, approving the Elkin Hills, NCD as your Planning Commission has recommended, will help to preserve one of Chapel Hill’s few remaining neighborhoods of reasonably priced single family homes and thus will promote our town goal of providing “a place for everyone.”

In a fascinating free talk sponsored by C.H.A.L.T. on October 12, John Quinterno of South by North Strategies Ltd., a local consulting firm specializing in economic and social policy, debunked the popular myth that Chapel Hill is a town that doesn’t grow. Both the town’s population and its housing stock grew by almost 50 percent from 1990 to 2010, and both are projected to keep growing. By any objective measure, Chapel Hill has grown tremendously, but the town’s growth has occurred in a more deliberate manner than in many other parts of the Triangle.

Understanding the reality of past growth in Chapel Hill is essential for understanding the context of the upcoming municipal elections. Many incumbent council members believe that Chapel Hill needs to grow at a much faster rate to make up for lost time and to keep pace with neighboring communities. To that end, the council has championed a trajectory of faster growth led by high-end, high-rise residential construction. While this new trajectory may be more financially lucrative for certain vested interests, it can impose significant costs on current residents and businesses in such forms as higher future taxes, congestion, environmental degradation, household and business displacement, and neighborhood destabilization.

“By any objective standard, Chapel Hill has grown rapidly, if more deliberately than other parts of the Triangle,” said Quinterno. “The decision to change course, then, is a political one that has little to do with growth and everything to do with power: the power to govern, the power to decide whose interests matter, the power to spend public dollars, and the power to require the public to subsidize the profits of favored private interests.”

Posted onMay 14, 2014|Comments Off on What happened at the May 12 meeting?

On May 12th the Town Council voted to upzone most of the Ephesus-Fordham tracts making up Eastgate, Village Plaza, the Park Apartments, and Rams Plaza to a brand new zone, a Form Based Code, with the stated goals of spurring redevelopment to increase Town revenues, and solving traffic and stormwater problems. We believe none of these goals were met.

During the Monday hearing, the Town Council barely discussed and chose not to adopt the many well-researched recommendations presented by a team of citizens and experts to improve the Form Based Code that applies to the Ephesus – Fordham area. A number of speakers called for a more robust walkable and vibrant Form Based Code that included affordable housing and energy efficiency, one that would yield a net positive revenue for the Town and one that would incorporate public review of projects. Second, speakers asked the Council to apply the new zone only to those sites where we want to encourage redevelopment, in other words limiting the number of properties that would receive the zone so as to give time to improve the Code. Thirdly, speakers asked the Council not to upzone properties in the floodplain until a future conditions flood map is complete, and not to rezone the Park Apartments until the Town replaces this stock of workforce housing. Finally, a petition was presented signed by 857 area residents to ask the Town to address these issues. See link to our key requests and the petition.

Despite the objections and concerns expressed by speakers, the Town Council majority voted to go ahead anyway, 6 – 3. (Affirmative: Mark Kleinschmidt, Maria Palmer, Donna Bell, Sally Greene, George Cianciolo and Lee Storrow) with the notable exceptions of NO votes from Council members Ed Harrison, Jim Ward, and Matt Czajkowski. A big thank you to Ed, Jim and Matt for taking to heart our concerns.

If you attended or watched last night’s Council meeting, please share your observations. Video of the proceedings is found here.

A Community Workshop will be held onSaturday morning, May 18, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Chapel Hill Public Library. The purpose of this Workshop is to gain community feedback to the Planning Principles and Concept Maps which are under development by the Central West Steering Committee. This Workshop is the last time for community input before the Steering Committee’s draft report is submitted to the Town Council on June 24.

The Workshop will have two major activities – a detailed agenda for the Community Workshop. The initial focus (9:00 to 10:10) will be on the Guiding Principles. The objectives for these Planning Principles will also be reviewed.

The second activity of the Workshop (10:20 to noon) is to review and react to the Guiding Principles and three maps. According to the Consultant these Concept Maps are an attempt to visualize three levels of development in the area of Estes and MLK: 1) residential focus, 2) residential and office focus, and 3) mixed use focus. Each map includes a possible new road structure. Also accompanying each of the three maps is a second map where estimates are made of the increasing density (as one moves from 1 –> 2 –> 3 ).

After you review the three Planning Concept maps you may want to look at a fourth map which reflects the current zoning and land use pattern in the Estes and MLK area. The Planning Concept maps above are not the exact ones you will be reviewing during the Workshop, because the ones provided are being revised by the consultants.

Please join the Community Workshop on Saturday morning the 18th; this Workshop is a critical step in the path toward the draft report by the Central West Steering Committee to the Council on June 24.

Posted onJanuary 2, 2013|Comments Off on Summary first Central West steering committee meeting

The first Central West Focus area was held on December 19, 2012 at the Town’s Transit Center. All the materials for the meeting been posted on the Town’s webpage. The neighbors took detailed notes which are found here: Dec 14 Steering Committee

Mayor Kleinschmidt greeted steering committee members and said that he expected recommendations would fit in with the neighborhoods and benefit the entire Town.

Deana Rhodeside, the consultant hired by the Town, moderated the meeting. Major points of agreement were: preference expressed for the Committee to have a strong role in setting the agenda; agreement to use a consensus model for decision making; and preference to meet more frequently than once a month in order to keep momentum going. The Consultant’s proposed schedule and timing of a charrette were discussed but were not approved.

Only a portion of the Consultant’s agenda was covered in the meeting. Steering Committee members raised many questions about the planning process suggested by the Consultant. Several steering committee members mentioned they had never participated before in this kind of process.

The Committee asked the consultant to send a new schedule with more frequent meetings and to provide a means for making suggestions on the next work plan. The Consultant said she would come back with new drafts for steering committee comment and invited members to email suggestions. No date has been set for the next meeting.

All steering committee meetings are open to the public. About 9 – 10 members of the public attended and observed the discussion. Public comment was taken. Council Member Jim Ward recommended the Committee reserve time for public comment at the beginning and end of each meeting. Dan Bruce suggested the Committee make use of existing data from the Carolina North studies. Dave Sidor recommended that the Committee review the Council resolution approving the committee and the community recommendations at the next meeting. Another commenter urged the use of citizen staffed study committees who could meet with experts and share information.

Please note that the Town has announced a “Sketching Chapel Hill” event in late January. The Consultant mentioned this session at the Dec 19 Central West meeting. It appears to be related to the 2020 plan and the Central West study but not much detail has yet been offered. See the steering committee members here.

The Consultant and the Town sent out a draft agenda for the first Steering Committee meeting for Dec 19 which leaves out key parts of the Council direction and the community work accomplished so far. We’ve reviewed the Council’s October 24 resolution and the Community recommendations and describe below the missing elements.

1. Where is the empowered Central West steering committee as envisioned in the Council resolution?:

Quotes from resolution:

“Create and deliver a small area plan for the Planning Area for Council consideration; create a schedule for the process and milestones for reporting to the community; and gather the necessary data/expertise for making informed decisions.”

“Maintain the integrity of the planning process and insure that the process is open and participatory; receive and integrate community feedback; facilitate communication with the community”

“The Steering Committee should decide how to make decisions during their initial Committee discussions. A decision-making process that focuses on broad consensus is encouraged so committee recommendations are reflective of the many interests in the focus area.”

Quotes from community recommendations:

“With the help of the process facilitator, the committee would develop the work plan, set meeting agendas, coordinate the work products, gather the data and expertise needed to make informed decisions, create plan drafts, receive and integrate community feedback on those drafts, and facilitate communication with the community.”

“The steering committee would also be responsible for creating a set of “milestones” in their process (these could be things like completion of an analysis of the region, determining a set of area goals/objectives/opportunities, providing an analysis of impacts, etc.). The organizing committee recommends that a community meeting be called by the steering committee when each of these milestones is achieved, to receive community comment for incorporation into the final plan document.”

2. Where is the “accordion principle” which provides for community input as the process goes along?

In the agreed upon resolution, the work of achieving the plan is shared between a steering committee and the community at large. The Consultant’s agenda proposes that steering committee members caucus or knock on doors with their “constituents”. This is not an adequate replacement for providing open public meetings and forums and is not the approach the Council adopted.

Quote from the Council resolution:

“The Steering Committee is encouraged to work with the consultant and staff to develop a process and schedule that will allow time for data collection and plan review and comment by the community at large at several stages throughout the process (the “accordion model”).”

3. Where are the Study committees in the Consultant’s plan?

Quote from Community recommendations:

“One initiative new to Chapel Hill, and growing out of the Big Ideas recommendations of the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, would be for the steering committee to request and encourage the formation of small citizen study groups organized around particular issues of importance to the Central West Focus Area (such as transit, traffic impacts, student housing, etc.). These study groups would work independently and become the area experts on their issue, gathering data and holding discussions with the goal of providing their expertise to inform the steering committee’s work. “

4. Where is the Vision discussion?

There is a reference in the Consultant’s agenda about what do we know about community character. Will there be materials presented? How will community input be gathered? Fred Lampe has gathered ideas from many people. When is the time to present this raw data?

5. Is the proposed schedule a plan on steroids?

How it is possible for the steering committee to “refine a small area plan” in March, only 3 months into a year long process?

6. How do we provide good communications as outlined in the community recommendations?

Quote from Community recommendations:

“The organizing committee suggests that a simpler, more easily searchable online tool for public comment be established, such as a Google or Yahoo e-mail group open to all. Most community members who use online systems are familiar with group e-mail systems, and they provide the transparency and ease of use that will allow better and more open communications.”

Build in a limited period for public comment at each steering committee meeting.

We’re happy to report that last Wednesday, October 24, the Council — after a lengthy discussion of our focus area proposals — accepted most of them. This endorsement of a community-driven process would not have been possible without your support, particularly the petition 213 of you signed in just three days! Thanks also to those of you who attended this exciting Council meeting to support our speakers.

Here are the main points that were endorsed by the Town Council.

Purpose of study: to create and deliver a small area plan for the Planning Area for Council consideration.

A geographic study area (a planning and an impact area) similar to the one adopted at the community meetings with the addition of a focus on undeveloped properties – an area that can be expanded.

Focus area study was renamed “Central West Focus Area”.

Steering Committee will be composed of a diversity of representation including, business owners, landowners, and residents from the planning and impact area.

All are invited to apply for the steering committee; council committee to recommend slate. Those with active development applications are not eligible.

Schedule of study and meetings: December 2012 – December 2013 with a report in June. All meetings will be open and your participation is invited.

We think the well-organized presentations of our speakers encouraged several Council members to take positions a bit different from their past orientations, and we will continue to encourage the Council to adopt a community-driven approach to considering how growth is to occur in our “Central West” area of Chapel Hill.

As events unfold, we will keep you informed about the small area study process, including possibilities for you to become more involved, for example, by making your views known directly to the Steering Committee, volunteering to serve on study groups addressing key issues, and talking with your neighbors about the overall process.

Applications for seats on the Central West Focus Area Steering Committee are currently being accepted. The application deadline is Monday, November 12, 2012, at 5:00pm. For a copy of the application and for more information about application process, please visit www.townofchapelhill.org/centralwest.

For the resolution that the Council adopted for the Central West Focus Area from the October 24, 2012 Business Meeting, please click here. This information has also been posted on the Town webpage which can be found at www.townofchapelhill.org/centralwest

The October 22 Round Table meeting announced by the Town will afford an opportunity for further dialogue among Community members, the staff and the planning board before the Town Council makes the final decision on the project design.

Come to the Council meeting October 24. The staff recommendations sent to the Council differed significantly from what was decided at the community meetings. Town webpage is here.

Based on conversations with citizens from the Central West Focus Area, Alan Tom drafted this mission statement. The statement was revised and edited by those who live in the 12 neighborhoods which are in this focus area and we invite comments.

Summary
Working from the premise that high “Quality Growth” is desirable for the Central West Focus Area and ultimately for all of Chapel Hill, we identify and describe five considerations which make such quality growth possible:

The Character of an Area – Determining the best ways to integrate higher density developments into our traditional single family neighborhoods, soon to be joined by Carolina North

Need for Development — Analyzing the need for development to reduce the risk of building out excessively, resulting in commercial and apartment vacancies and a declining Town image

Cost Effectiveness – Making sure that new development really produces more tax revenue than the costs such development imposes on infrastructure and Town services

Transportation – Attending to implications of new development for automobile traffic, bike travel, and pedestrian safety, all within the context of the traffic to be generated by Carolina North

Environmental Impacts – Anticipating and remediating the effects of new development on storm-water run-off, including the impact of storm-water diversion on downstream neighborhoods.

Addressing each of these considerations, while evaluating development proposals, makes it possible for development projects in our area to be of high quality, which in turn fosters the quality of life for the entire community of Chapel Hill.

Background
The Central West Citizens group is composed of homeowners and renters from over ten neighborhoods in Chapel Hill. Membership is open to any person who endorses the view of “Quality Growth” which follows.

While preparing this statement of our core beliefs on development in the Central West Focus Area, we found a blog which indicated that our orientation is misunderstood. This blog suggests that our interests are narrow in scope — essentially limited to guarding our neighborhoods — and that we are anti-development in orientation.

We admit to having great pride in our neighborhoods but also believe that our concern for high quality growth is good not only for our neighborhoods but also for all of Chapel Hill. Our view is longterm. We are conscious that in the not-too-distant future our location adjacent to Carolina North will place us in the center of the northern gateway entrance to Chapel Hill. New development in our key location, therefore, must be of the highest possible quality.

Introduction. Fifty years ago the vicinity around the intersection of Estes Drive and Airport Road (now Martin Luther King Boulevard) was on the perimeter of the single family housing surrounding the University. Some roads were not yet paved. Over time, as the university and the medical center expanded, more single family homes were built on half-acre and up to two-acre wooded lots that eventually covered the hills around Eastwood Lake, both sides of Estes Drive from Franklin Street to Phillips Middle School, and the high land in the Mount Bolus area, with a few apartments and some commercial properties extending along Airport Road.

About 25-30 years ago, as the Town’s rate of growth accelerated, the whole community had a long dialogue about the downside of sprawl: increased driving distances, more cars on the road, more pollution, and so forth. There was general agreement that the Town should focus on infill and increased density. Land use planning and special use permits reflected this revised thinking; newer housing developments in the area are on smaller lots. Now we are a mixture of single family housing and apartments, along with some commercial development, but the dominant tone of our overall area remains single family housing.

Today we are at a critical juncture as a number of high density developments are being proposed for our Central West Area; other proposals are sure to follow; and four undeveloped properties on the south side of North Estes are currently for sale. We – the residents of the Central West Area — are homeowners and renters who have come together to address the situation we now face – what is the proper approach for the continuing development of our area. As a group, Central West residents are dedicated to the “Quality Growth” of our neighborhoods and our Town.

This statement, of course, raises the question of what we mean by “Quality Growth” and what implications our concern for “Quality Growth” has for our neighborhoods and our Town of Chapel Hill. We believe that the following five considerations are an excellent basis for evaluating the quality of proposed developments. “Quality Growth” occurs when there is a focus on:
• Character of an Area,
• Need for Development (demand analysis)
• Cost Effectiveness (of development)
• Transportation (broadly construed)
• Environmental Impacts (of development)

These five considerations identify when development is the intelligent choice for our neighborhoods and our Town.

To explore these considerations further, we provide detail and examples about how these five considerations can work to help us identify “Quality Growth” proposals when we see them. We use examples primarily from our focus area; however, other examples could be drawn from the Town as a whole.

Character of an Area. Our area is soon to be affected by a new presence – the creation of Carolina North. As planned, this campus will be welcoming and stately; it will add to the beauty and attractiveness of the community. But we do not know what the future holds for the surrounding area. Will Martin Luther King Boulevard along Carolina North ultimately become a second Franklin Street? Will North Estes Drive and Extension be totally overcome by the future flow of traffic? These and other questions have yet to be answered, but we do believe that if development is prudently pursued our homes can be part of a new vital urban area, with Carolina North at its center.

For this reason, our home values may well increase, but only if the area remains attractive, traversable, and safe. To insure that successful development is achieved, we are prepared to work directly with landowners interested in the development of their properties if these landowners are committed to pursuing development that enhances the overall appeal of our neighborhoods and the safety of our corridors. We can and must work together to find an intelligent balance between retaining and enhancing the extraordinary, livable quality of our single family neighborhoods and the benefits and amenities that infill and higher density development can offer. We owe it to ourselves and to our future generations.

Need for Development. How quickly development is needed in Chapel Hill depends on whether the kind of development being proposed makes sense in light of current demand for such development; we are calling this kind of assessment “demand analysis.” A typical demand analysis for commercial space should look at what commercial space is needed, what similar development is already approved but not yet built, and what existing commercial space is currently vacant. The same kind of demand analysis can be performed for other kinds of development, ranging from undergraduate student housing to single family apartments. Ironically, such demand analysis data are amazingly hard to come by; one would think that the Town of Chapel Hill – or the local Chamber of Commerce – would have data on currently available space, but we have not succeeded in locating comprehensive data on the vacancy rate, Town-wide, for commercial and apartment space. Assessing the demand – particularly the future demand – for space is difficult, but it must be attempted if we are to achieve “quality growth” for future development in Chapel Hill.

“Quality Growth” occurs when demand analysis is a central focus in assessing the need for commercial and housing development. In our part of Chapel Hill, such demand analysis needs to pay special attention to the anticipated demand vis-à-vis Carolina North whose future unfolding has already been approved by the Town in the form of a development agreement. We know that the “apron” surrounding Carolina North will have enormous and varied demands made on it over the next 20-30 years, yet some potential developers with properties on that apron do not seem to be considering how their prospective developments might fit in with the growth of Carolina North.

Cost Effectiveness. Towns which grew up – as did Chapel Hill – with a predominant focus on single family housing and only a modest amount of commercial development typically face pressure to raise local property taxes. High property taxes are never popular, and many towns and small cities look to increased development as a way to broaden the tax base. Thus Chapel Hillians should always ask: Will this particular development generate more tax revenue than the costs imposed by the increased demands on town services and infrastructure, particularly on the road system which is already stretched to capacity in some parts of Chapel Hill? Longer term, we must also consider the increased pressure new development places on everything from the OWASA water supply to enrollment in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Public Schools.

“Quality Growth” occurs when a developer is able – and actually does – demonstrate how a particular development project is a net plus for the overall financial condition of Chapel Hill. Such estimates require developers to complete additional work – particularly for new businesses and apartment complexes – but obtaining any development approval should be conditional upon this work being performed in advance with results that are persuasive.

Transportation. Chapel Hill developed with a road structure well suited to single family homes spread around a downtown core area. As the Town grew, it became increasingly clear that this web-like road structure placed capacity constraints on automobile traffic that does not occur in communities with a more grid-like road structure. Roads such as Estes Drive (North and Extension) that were designed to connect neighborhoods have evolved into cross-town arterials which often lack attention to biking and pedestrian safety and to other alternatives to automobiles. Additionally, the traffic generated by an ever increasing number of vehicles on these roads is a direct result of incremental approvals of development along these corridors; this increased traffic has generated a variety of traffic bottlenecks.

“Quality Growth” occurs when the constraints of our road structure are recognized and addressed prior to (or certainly concurrent with) new development proposals. For example, the Town employed this concurrency principle when negotiating the Carolina North Development Agreement. As Carolina North is built out, the University will be required to make improvements to the existing transportation system. Applying this principle of concurrency means that at times it is not prudent to proceed with a development proposal due to our inability to make needed changes to our transportation system. At other times the nature of a development can be altered in consultation with the affected neighborhood interests which understand at a personal level the likely traffic implications of a particular development.

Environmental Impacts. While a variety of environmental impacts are possible, storm-water run-off is one of the most pressing. Water quality and creek ecology are dramatically affected when trees are removed and those same areas paved over as part of new developments. With the percentage of paved areas increasing over the years, storm water is less able to be absorbed into the remaining ground to replenish groundwater supplies. As a result, urban creeks can become raging torrents of water which both cause erosion and carry sediment into water bodies, compromising both water quality and stream habitat.

“Quality Growth” occurs when the Town pays close attention to storm-water impacts during the concept plan stage before proceeding with a development that could result in unforeseen downstream impacts. Town storm-water ordinances and Jordan Lake rules must be applied to all new development to avoid costly mistakes. Greater densities in development pose particular challenges as a certain amount of unpaved land area is needed for storm-water control. The most aggressive controls should be employed when multiple commercial and apartment development are being considered because of the large number of impervious surfaces they typically employ. Additionally, a proper storm-water impact study should consider how storm-water is redirected through existing neighborhoods as new developments are introduced into the area. The cost to mitigate unintended storm-water run-off needs to be included as a cost of implementing the proposed development.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the above five considerations illustrate how we are dedicated to the “Quality Growth” for our area and our Town. Our interests are long-term; we have purchased homes with the desire to stay here for an extended period of time. However, we do worry about the short-term perspective so many – but not all — potential developers seem to hold and the reluctance of some developers to engage area residents in helping them plan the use of their property so that the result is both profitable to them and appropriate to the Central West area. We are ready to engage.

So with this perspective, we look forward to participating in the impending study to produce the Central West Small Area Plan. We invite any resident – homeowner or renter – to join us to work within the framework of the five considerations which support our vision of “Quality Growth.” Making these considerations central to the Town’s small area planning may increase the effort a potential developer needs to gain approval for a proposed development, but in the long run following these principles will help ensure that “Quality Growth” is achieved and reflected in the neighborhoods and that the Town can augment its tax base.

Recommendation Meeting #4 for the Proposed Central West Focus Area (formerly the MLK/Estes Drive Focus Area) will be held on Monday, October 1, 2012, from 7:00-9:00 pm in the Large Training Room at the Transit Building, 6900 Millhouse Road, Chapel Hill, 27516.The purpose of this meeting is to continue to develop the recommendations about the Steering Committee structure and purpose as well as the scope and schedule for the planning process about to begin for our area.

These recommendations, when complete, will be combined with the recommendations about the name, boundary, and Steering Committee and presented to the Town Council on Thursday, October 11th.